| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
24 May 2006 : Column 1876W—continued
South London;
Hampshire and Isle of Wight; and
Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire
We expect a further tranche of ITNs to be issued in the summer.
Negotiations are also under way with bidders on seven regional diagnostics schemes. These are in the following areas:
London;
the North East;
the West Midlands;
the North West;
the South East;
the South West; and
the East
IT Reviews
Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the statement from her Department of 10 April 2006 that the national programme for IT is under constant review and audit, with what frequency such reviews and audits are conducted; if she will list the bodies that (a) have conducted, (b) are conducting and (c) plan to conduct such reviews and audits; and if she will place in the Library a list of required actions that have resulted from those reviews and audits conducted. [69654]
Caroline Flint [ holding answer 9 May 2006]: The national programme has been subject from its inception to the Office of Government Commence (OGC) Gateway process. Gateway reviews have been, and continue to be, undertaken at each of the standard stages throughout the development of every project within the programme, and of its cluster-based deployment activity from initiation to live running. A similar annual and ongoing programme of audit reviews has been and continues to be carried out by the Department’s internal auditors. A National Audit Office (NAO) value for money study into choice at the point of referral which reported in January 2005, involved close scrutiny of the work of the national programme and specifically the choose and book programme. The report on a further NAO study into wider aspects of the programme has yet to be published, and this has included an independent review of programme management capability. In addition, the programme’s own quality management function undertakes a broad range of reviews and audits of
specific aspects of programme, cluster and supplier activity on an ongoing basis.
A number of independent reviews have been commissioned under contract, including one commissioned from McKinsey to inform the approach before the start of the programme, and from other suppliers to establish the value for the national health service and taxpayer achieved through the contracts and to examine specific aspects such as disaster recovery. In addition, there is ongoing review by transparent discussion with key stakeholder groups including the British Medical Association and through consultation initiated by the care record development board.
OGC Gateway reports and other reports have been provided in confidence in order not to impair the value of the advice they contain and to protect commercial confidentiality. We have no plans to publish the outcome of these reports. Given the number of reviews and audits concerned, extraction of recommendations in each case could be done only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she intends to commission an independent audit of the National programme for IT in the NHS. [71438]
Caroline Flint: The National programme is already the focus of regular and routine audit, scrutiny and review. It has been subject from its inception to the Office of Government Commerce Gateway process. Gateway reviews have been, and continue to be, undertaken at each of the standard stages throughout the development of every component project within the programme, and of its cluster-based deployment activity from initiation through to live running. A similar annual and ongoing programme of audit reviews has been, and continues to be, carried out by the Department's internal auditors.
A National Audit Office (NAO) value for money study into choice at the point of referral, which reported in January 2005, involved close scrutiny of the work of the national programme and specifically the choose and book programme. The report on a further NAO value for money study into wider aspects of the programme has yet to be published, and this has included an independent review of programme management capability.
In addition, the programme's own quality management function undertakes a broad range of reviews and audits of specific aspects of programme, cluster and supplier activity on an ongoing basis.
A number of independent reviews have been commissioned under contract, including one commissioned from McKinsey to inform the approach before the start of the programme, and from other suppliers to establish the value for the national health service and taxpayer achieved through the contracts and to examine specific aspects such as disaster recovery. Ongoing review is also encouraged by transparent discussion with key stakeholder groups
including the British Medical Association and through consultation initiated by the care record development board.
We remain confident that the technical architecture of the national programme is appropriate and will enable benefits to be delivered for patients, and value for money for the taxpayer, without further independent scrutiny.
Junior Doctors
Dr. Richard Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the consequences of the Association of University Teachers action short of a strike on the final qualification of medical students in June 2006; and what arrangements she is making to ensure that NHS junior doctors’ posts can be filled on 1 August 2006. [72340]
Ms Rosie Winterton: It is a matter for higher education institutions to consider how best they can minimise the adverse effects on students of the current dispute, including making contingency arrangements for exams and assessment.
The dispute will not have a great impact on graduating medical students because their assessments will be conducted by clinical academic staff (including some national health service staff with honorary academic appointments) who, if they belong to a trade association, are normally British Medical Association members.
Postgraduate deans are working closely with their heads of medical schools to monitor the situation.
Long-term (Neurological) Conditions Framework
Dr. Stoate: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how the Government are measuring implementation of the national service framework for long-term (neurological) conditions; and what progress has been made in implementation since it was published. [72719]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Department is coordinating a range of activity to support national and local implementation of the national service framework (NSF) for long-term neurological conditions. This includes:
working with key national health service, social care, voluntary and independent sector stakeholders, as well as service users and carers, to identify and address key issues in neurological services and the stakeholders' role in implementation;
ensuring that other key delivery programmes, most especially the White Paper “Our Health, Our Care, Our Say” and the long-term conditions strategy help deliver key NSF objectives; and
work to support local delivery, including regional implementation workshops, a web-based getting started pack and self-assessment tool for services through the Care Services Improvement Partnership to provide practical help to local health and social care organisations.
Progress on implementation will be measured in a number of ways, including:
research studies commissioned as part of a national research initiative to underpin implementation of the NSF, to provide baseline data needed to measure the subsequent impact of the NSF;
work to develop a national minimum dataset for long-term neurological conditions;
implementation of clinical indicators developed as part of the better metrics programme;
and
work with the Healthcare Commission and Commission for Social Care Inspection to identify ways of monitoring and inspecting progress.
Long-term Care
Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent reports she has considered on the cost of long-term care; and if she will make a statement. [72842]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Department welcomed the publication of “Securing Good Care for Older People”, the King’s Fund review led by Sir Derek Wanless into long-term social care for older people in England.
The report is an important starting point that we need to feed into our work on the 2007 comprehensive spending review. To inform this work we are bringing in external experts. We are delighted that Sir Derek Wanless has agreed to be one of these experts.
Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what representations she has received on retaining ring-fenced funding for primary care trusts for the provision of myalgic encephalomyelitis support services; and if she will make a statement; [72908]
(2) what steps her Department is taking to support people with myalgic (a) encephalomyelitis and (b) encephalopathy; [72909]
(3) what funding the Government have allocatedto continuing specialist services for myalgic (a) encephalomyelitis and (b) encephalopathy; and if she will make a statement; [72910]
(4) what advice her Department plans to issue to primary care trusts on funding for specialist services for myalgic (a) encephalomyelitis and (b) encephalopathy in 2006-07; [72911]
(5) what support her Department provides for patients with myalgic (a) encephalomyelitis and (b) encephalopathy who are (i) bed and (ii) house bound and unable to attend the newly developed specialist services; and if she will make a statement. [72912]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: People with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis/encephalopathy (CFS/ME) have access to the full range of health and social services support as outlined in the national service framework for long-term conditions (the NSF). This includes:
Joint health and social care plans that change over time and consider other needs such as housing, transport, benefits, education, careers advice, employment and leisure;
Access to a broad range of services, including rehabilitation, equipment, accommodation and personal care to help people live as independently as possible at home; and
Support to help people to work or take up other vocational opportunities.
The £8.5 million budget to establish new CFS/ME services has supported the development of 13 clinical network co-ordinating centres (CNCCs) and 36 local multidisciplinary teams (LMDTs), as well as 11 specialist children and young people teams across England.
The role of the LMDTs is to lead the development of services within primary and secondary care to support general practitioners and other relevant professionals in the care of the patient. In this respect, LMDTs are expected to develop networks of local domiciliary services, including health education and social services, to support those more severely affected, including those who are housebound and bed bound and are therefore unable to access services.
Funding of CFS/ME services from 2006-07 is included within the resource allocations to primary care trusts (PCTs), PCTs have been informed that this funding would be included within their baseline allocations.
Ministers and departmental officials regularly receive representations seeking dedicated funding for a range of specific diseases and conditions, including CFS/ME. These include a number of questions from Members, which appear in the Official Report, for example on 17 May 2006, column 1108W and 6 March 2006, column 1198W.
Midwifery
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) which midwife-led maternity units are (a) within a primary care trust, (b) within an acute trust, (c) within another setting or (d) independent; [72757]
(2) which (a) primary care trusts, (b) acute trusts and (c) other NHS bodies have midwife-led maternity units on their premises. [72758]
Mr. Ivan Lewis [holding answer 23 May 2006]: This information is not collected centrally.
Neonatal Units (London)
Mr. Pelling: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average occupancy rates were in each London neonatal unit in each of the last three years. [72372]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Department does not collect the information in the format requested. Data are for occupancy of neonatal beds and is collected only at trust level rather than at neonatal unit level.
The average daily occupancy rate for neonatal intensive care beds for national health service organisations in London, 2002-03 to 2004-05 is shown in the table.
| Percentage | ||||
| Strategic health authority name | Organisation | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 |
|
Barking Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust (King George site) | ||||
| Source: Department of Health form KH03 |
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |